From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25424 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2014 18:30:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 25395 invoked by uid 89); 28 Mar 2014 18:30:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mtaout25.012.net.il Received: from mtaout25.012.net.il (HELO mtaout25.012.net.il) (80.179.55.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:30:10 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout25.012.net.il by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N3500N00S40VH00@mtaout25.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:28:48 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N3500JD9SNZKN60@mtaout25.012.net.il>; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 21:28:48 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:30:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix "PC register is not available" issue In-reply-to: <5335B619.6040605@redhat.com> To: Pedro Alves Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <8361myfa6l.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83txawa9wk.fsf@gnu.org> <20140318161608.GD4282@adacore.com> <83pplja2h9.fsf@gnu.org> <20140318165413.GE4282@adacore.com> <834n2kztfw.fsf@gnu.org> <53358C37.9050907@redhat.com> <83a9cafcpz.fsf@gnu.org> <5335B619.6040605@redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg00671.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:49:13 +0000 > From: Pedro Alves > CC: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > >> Why bother calling SetThreadContext at all if we just killed > >> the process? > > > > See my other mail and Joel's response. > > Not sure what you mean. TerminateProcess is asynchronous, and > we need to resume the inferior and collect the debug events > until we see the process terminate. But, my question is > why would we write the thread's registers at all if we > just told it to die? Seems to be we could just skip > calling SetThreadContext instead of calling it but > ignoring the result. If you say so, I don't know enough about this stuff. > >> Sounds like GDBserver might have this problem too. > > > > If there's an easy way to verify that, without having 2 systems > > talking via some communications line, please tell how, and I will try > > that. > > Sure, you can run gdbserver and gdb on the same machine, and connect > with tcp. Just: > > $ gdbserver :9999 myprogram.exe > > in one terminal, and: > > $ gdb myprogram.exe -ex "tar rem :9999" -ex "b main" -ex "c" > > in another. OK, will try that.